Estimating the cost-effectiveness of tumor treating fields for locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients

BACKGROUND: Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) is associated with limited survival, high symptom burden, and few therapeutic innovations. The PANOVA-3 trial evaluated Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy applied with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) for first-line treatment of LAPC, demonstrating improved overall survival (OS), distant progression-free survival (PFS), and time to pain progression. We conducted a cost-utility analysis to evaluate the economic value of TTFields + GnP relative to GnP alone. METHODS: A partitioned survival model was developed using trial-based Kaplan-Meier curves for OS, distant progression-PFS, and time to pain progression. Model inputs reflected the intent-to-treat (ITT) population from PANOVA-3, with health utilities, resource use, and costs obtained from published U.S. sources. Disutility for pain was applied during time after pain worsening to capture quality-of-life decrement. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3% annually, and analyses were conducted from a U.S. payer perspective. Deterministic, probabilistic, and scenario analyses explored uncertainty in key assumptions and model structure. RESULTS: TTFields + GnP increased discounted lifetime costs to $351,400 vs. $220,000 for GnP alone, with an incremental gain of 0.34 QALYs and an ICER of $387,300 per QALY. Approximately 0.03 QALYs were attributable to reduced time lived with pain. Sensitivity analyses identified TTFields therapy cost and treatment duration as primary drivers of the ICER. Scenario analyses produced ICERs ranging from $391,800 to $547,200 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: TTFields + GnP improves survival and delays pain progression in LAPC, generating measurable gains in quality-adjusted survival. Resulting ICERs should be interpreted in the context of a disease with high unmet need, poor prognosis, and limited therapeutic options; factors that support a broader assessment of value beyond conventional cost-effectiveness thresholds. The multidimensional benefits observed, including quality-of-life gains, reinforce the case for TTFields therapy in LAPC and highlight the importance of incorporating such endpoints into economic evaluations of late-stage cancers.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Medical Economics
Published
2026-07-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2026.2707046
Primary Topic
Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Estimating the cost-effectiveness of tumor treating fields for locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients

Gregory F. Guzauskas, Vincent Picozzi, Bruce C. M. Wang, Jorge Fernando Niño de Rivera Guzman
Journal of Medical Economics
Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
article

Estimating the cost-effectiveness of tumor treating fields for locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients

Gregory F. Guzauskas, Vincent Picozzi, Bruce C. M. Wang, Jorge Fernando Niño de Rivera Guzman
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) is associated with limited survival, high symptom burden, and few therapeutic innovations. The PANOVA-3 trial evaluated Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy applied with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) for first-line treatment of LAPC, demonstrating improved overall survival (OS), distant progression-free survival (PFS), and time to pain progression. We conducted a cost-utility analysis to evaluate the economic value of TTFields + GnP relative to GnP alone. METHODS: A partitioned survival model was developed using trial-based Kaplan-Meier curves for OS, distant progression-PFS, and time to pain progression. Model inputs reflected the intent-to-treat (ITT) population from PANOVA-3, with health utilities, resource use, and costs obtained from published U.S. sources. Disutility for pain was applied during time after pain worsening to capture quality-of-life decrement. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3% annually, and analyses were conducted from a U.S. payer perspective. Deterministic, probabilistic, and scenario analyses explored uncertainty in key assumptions and model structure. RESULTS: TTFields + GnP increased discounted lifetime costs to $351,400 vs. $220,000 for GnP alone, with an incremental gain of 0.34 QALYs and an ICER of $387,300 per QALY. Approximately 0.03 QALYs were attributable to reduced time lived with pain. Sensitivity analyses identified TTFields therapy cost and treatment duration as primary drivers of the ICER. Scenario analyses produced ICERs ranging from $391,800 to $547,200 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: TTFields + GnP improves survival and delays pain progression in LAPC, generating measurable gains in quality-adjusted survival. Resulting ICERs should be interpreted in the context of a disease with high unmet need, poor prognosis, and limited therapeutic options; factors that support a broader assessment of value beyond conventional cost-effectiveness thresholds. The multidimensional benefits observed, including quality-of-life gains, reinforce the case for TTFields therapy in LAPC and highlight the importance of incorporating such endpoints into economic evaluations of late-stage cancers.

Journal of Medical EconomicsVol. 29(1)
Virginia Mason Medical Center (US), Health Economics and Outcomes Research (United Kingdom) (GB), Novocure (United States) (US)
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.